Dominant societies often lend their language to the rest of the world as they spread their influence cross-culturally: Greek, Latin, Arabic, Spanish, French, English, Swahili etc.

Of course, a trade language gives advantage to its native speakers. Yet, the alternatives are not usually very practical. If we don’t use a shared language, how else do we communicate important ideas? One model is that of the United Nations, which provides expensive simultaneous tranlations in its sessions, so that each national representative may speak in his/her national language. Yet, I suspect that in the hallways of the UN and behind closed doors, where important decisions are made, things may be different.

English has become in our time the dominant trade language in international contexts. On the one hand, it is a useful tool; on the other it favors native English speakers.

I have developped some suggestions for how it can be used more productively in international gatherings. These suggestions recognize its limitations as well as its advantages as a trade language, and offer practical ways to minimize the problem and increase the benefit.
If you are interested in seeing this documnt, let me know and I will gladly send a copy to you. It doesn’t resolve all the issues, but it can improve effectiveness in international meetings.

I had to think a great deal about the above comment from Joy. The AVM chooses to carry out ministry using the languages of the people being reached. So then, what to do if someone of such a language engages a vulnerable missionary using a Western language?

Of course, everyone is welcome into this debate. But is there a greater level of privilege for two-thirds world people? If so, then will we be cutting off our own legs, as again important debate will happen in English, and whatever happens in African language will only be that which remains for those who are uneducated and so not able to understand English.

Of course non-Westerners have insights that many Westerners do not have and would benefit from. But can they communicate them sufficiently helpfully in a language rooted in a context other than their own (of which they may have limited knowledge), as to earn them privileged position in missiological debate?

I first heard about Vulnerable Mission from my dad this weekend. We had some interesting discussions on your thoughts and efforts during this Easter time. I feel that you are onto something, and wish all the best for your work!

As someone not familiar with the Swahili language, though, I’d love to have the above comment translated into English… (Finnish would be even better… ) I suppose it was an answer to the question posed by the commentator named Joy? If not, I’d also be interested in hearing what you think about that question as I’m sure it’s something you have had to think about in your mission already.

If you fail to listen to the voice from the two-third world, your labor is in vain, the mistakes will be repeated, sadly. Exclusivity in theological reflections is like a weak one legged stool, cannot hold any weight. Think about this.

Thanks also for Alex’ comments. In short – yes, I would consider participating in events where these ideas can be more widely shared, and I think others in AVM will also. These AVM conferences among other things are a means to ‘get the issue onto the radar’ for folks.

There is also an extent to which a ‘vulnerable missionary’ ought not to be constantly travelling to international conferences. The above all fall within my three-yearly furlough. I guess that is part of the debate!

Jim Harries

Alex Araujo